a thoughtful web.
badges  ·  tags  ·  community 
Welcome to Hubski.   We share good ideas and conversation here.   Login or Join Us!
Freedom of speech? or hate crime?

by khaaan · #unitedkingdom
posted 430 days ago · shared by: 6
Azhar Ahmed, 19, posted comments on his Facebook page bemoaning the level of attention the British soldiers received in comparison with the Afghan civilian victims of the conflict. He has now been charged with a racially aggravated public order offence in connection with the posting after being arrested last week.

Image of facebook comment



by Laurelai 430 days ago  ·  link
While I don't agree with his sentiment I think he should have the right to express his opinions. He was not advocating specific action against people just general hostility.
reply
by mk 430 days ago  ·  link
Agreed. This is ridiculous. A 19 year-old says something dumb and unpopular in a Facebook feed. That is a crime?

He is not inciting violence.

reply
by JakobVirgil 430 days ago  ·  link
but he is being angry dumb and unpopular with a Muslim name.

That is the real story. If Nigel Haversham-Smith IV posted this same thing nothing would have happened.

reply
by mk 430 days ago  ·  link
True enough. Just yesterday when I was moving some old stored items about, I came across a newspaper I saved from 09-12-01. It was the Detroit Free Press, and the headline was something like: "America Savaged, Forever Changed". The Forever Changed part was prescient.

The whole world was changed for the worse that day. Azhar's arrest is because of that day.

reply
by alpha0 430 days ago  ·  link
| "The Forever Changed part was prescient."

Debatable ...

reply
by mk 430 days ago  ·  link
Ok, well as prescient as a newspaper headline gets... Maybe it was more "telling us what to expect".
reply
by JakobVirgil 430 days ago  ·  link
that is how the terrorists won.
reply
by cliffelam 430 days ago  ·  link
I've never actually understood the phrase "hate crime" - except in context:

"Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thoght? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it."

-XC

reply
by b_b 430 days ago  ·  link
Whose quote is that? I love it. We're legislating thought crimes away by popular demand, and it scares me. I think that hate crimes are a terrible idea, in principle. If you beat someone, or kill someone, or destroy property, then you should be punished. Obviously, motive has to come into play somewhere, as in, was this crime intentional, and is the criminal likely to repeatedly offend? But where do you draw the line? I'm surprised that hate crime legislation hasn't been found unconstitutional. The current Court, as much as I don't generally like them, is certainly hell bent on protecting free speech.
reply
by cliffelam 430 days ago  ·  link
George Orwell, I believe it was from Winston, but it's been years. And I may have mangled the quote.

I blew up a meeting the other day when we did a 'bout face and I said "We have always been at war with East Asia."

_XC

reply
by caio 430 days ago  ·  link
I believe it's actually from his nerdy friend who's into dictionaries. Ampleforth is his name.

Here's the whole quote from WikiQuote:

    Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed, will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten.
reply
by cliffelam 430 days ago  ·  link
Nice, I'd forgotten that last bit.

I had a friend whose wife thought that everyone should wear a uniform so that you could glance at them and know their job, their SES, etc, etc.

_XC

reply
by ecib 430 days ago  ·  link
Thanks for the context. It was sorely lacking in the newspaper article :)

At any rate, I think it's unconscionable that this is a crime that this young man has been arrested for. I don't quite see how any thinking person could see otherwise, even taking into consideration that Brits don't have the same 1st amendment protections that we enjoy.

reply
by JakobVirgil 430 days ago  ·  link
    1st amendment protections that we enjoy.
like to think we enjoy.
reply
by b_b 430 days ago  ·  link
    I hate the army and I hate the RAF.
--Joe Strummer

I've always loved that line (from "Career Opportunities"), because of how bold it is. I didn't think anyone in the US could ever get away with saying such a thing. I naively thought that maybe Britain didn't have an armed services cult worship like we do. Guess not. Words don't hurt. If they think the guy is a radical or a terrorist, investigate him. If they don't find anything, then leave him alone.

reply
by scarp 429 days ago  ·  link
I don't even see the need for an investigation.
reply
by JakobVirgil 430 days ago  ·  link
I could not see anything it the post that could be illegal distasteful but not illegal then I see the "youths" name Azhar Ahmed.

He is in clear violation of "being radical while brown" laws.

reply
by forwardslash 430 days ago  ·  link
Well this doesn't bode well. As glad as I may be that this person's wishes of death and hell on people has brought consequences, this seems to set a bad precedent.
reply


about hubski  ·  faq  ·  rss  ·  tmi  ·  twitter  ·  buttons  ·  tools  ·  arc  ·  privacy & terms  ·  login